You are presenting misleading facts, defamation by implication if you will. You know, and I know, that you were talking about the play on running downs. But you included sack yardage, which has no relevance to the running game.
That's like a case I had a few years ago. Among other heinous things this dangerous and diabolical woman did was make a totally false police report that caused my client's arrest, overnight incarceration, and about $10,000 in criminal defense fees. The County Attorney ultimately realized what was going on and just dropped the case. In the interim, Dr. Spooky (her local nickname) sent an email to everyone in a DM area school district email list, so about 2000 people with my client's mug shot and details of her arrest.
Well, the arrest was for harassment claiming my client sat behind Dr. Spooky at a 4 Mile Rec center youth basketball game. Since she was a doctor-and she played that card to the max-the local police morons made the arrest with no investigation.
In the civil defamation case, we interviewed everyone that was known to be at 4 Mile and every single one of them said they never saw Dr. Spooky on that date or time. Following a discovery request Dr. Spooky destroyed her smart phone so we couldn't get the geodata off it. The geodata would have corroborated the 15-20 witnesses we called from 4 Mile and shown Dr. Spooky was not even at 4 Mile Rec Center on the date and time alleged.
The detail I gave above is the defamation by implication claim. Every single word in that mass email to the school email list was literally true. BUT, and that's a big but, Dr. Spooky forgot to include that the arrest was prompted by her own numerous lies to area law enforcement, and to one cop on one day, and that her victim never did anything to her. So, withholding that information changed the context of the truthful statements to a defamatory statement.
Some 14 days of trial produced a $ 1.14 million dollar judgment. That's what you are doing, albeit without the psycho motivation and level of dishonesty. You were explicitly describing, in detail, the running game performance. You counted up the running plays including the sack yardage to diminish the huge improvement the running game showed against Bucky. You also said every Iowa run but the TD ended behind the chains. It took just a quick look to find at least 9 other running plays that put Iowa ahead of the chains.
The offense isn't good but you don't need to make up or distort facts to make seem worse. When you start making things up or presenting misleading arguments to diminish Iowa is kind of the threshold of not really being an Iowa fan anymore.
